Log in

View Full Version : Hitting the Nail on the Head



Capitalist Lawyer
8th March 2006, 01:34
Talk about hitting the nail on the head!

Caution: May put your beliefs about society into question.


In our last article entitled "Why Can’t We Reform our Criminals" we talked about the upsurge of recidivism since the therapeutic mentality took over the task of transitioning criminals back into society. According to this group, it’s parents who didn’t attend every single soccer game, parents who didn’t tolerate their children’s individuality and let them be themselves, or in other words; parents who didn’t grant the kids’ every wish who are to blame. Plus, of course, another major factor is "Society" in general. We, as a society, just didn’t care enough, weren’t tolerant enough, and expected too much.

Gasp... there was even competition in schools and - gasp - children were actually grade-ranked on their academic performance. So, there’s the root cause of crime. It’s not the criminals’ fault! It’s everybody else’s fault. It’s society’s fault.

However, typical of the therapeutic mentality, they’ve got it all upside down. Studies have shown that those who chose crime - yes, they chose crime, it wasn’t the only alternative - did so because of the very things that are now accepted as normal child rearing patterns. Let the children "be themselves," don’t burden them with "unrealistic expectations" and when they inevitably make mistakes, don’t criticize them. Or at least blame the schools or society, but never, ever, ask the child to take responsibility for their own actions. Respect for parents and authority are just "old fashioned" notions. Instead, we should embrace the "progressive" notion that children already have within themselves all the knowledge they need. They don’t need the advice and counsel of grown-ups; they just need to be "empowered" to bring out their natural, inherent goodness. They won’t benefit from self-respect, but they’ll wither without self-esteem.

In order to bring out this inherent wisdom and goodness, they must never be allowed to compete; hence, grades in school should adjusted to make them feel good about themselves. Games and group activities should be re-framed as opportunities for everyone to be a winner. Note, we’re not talking about the sportsmanlike winner congratulating the loser for a good showing, but actually calling the loser a winner too. We shouldn’t reward observed excellence. That would be too judgmental. That would be too harsh.

Our language is reflecting this cultural change. Beware when you hear some of these.

"She just can’t handle disappointment." Translation: Spoiled brat; coddled by never having to acknowledge failure.

"He has ODD ." Translation: Spoiled brat whose lack of self-control has been pathologized by a pseudo-scientific label that gives him free rein to be a spoiled brat... usually at taxpayer expense. Also lets the parents off the responsibility hook.

"He only wants to be accepted." Translation: No matter what he does, we’re supposed to "celebrate" it. Wouldn’t it be great if we could say or do (or not do) anything we liked and everyone would "accept" us for "just being me" ?

"She doesn’t feel good about herself." Translation: Never, ever ask the child to shape up and take responsibility for their lives, but rather ask what we can do to help. We should consider any or all of the following: de-grade the school system, pervert family values, turn our own personalities upside down, all so that the children can feel good about themselves without actually growing up. Always give the impression that the only thing that matters is feeling good, not being good.

When we coddle kids from the cradle through seven years of college for a four-year degree, we can expect to get exactly what we created. The mild version is a population of aging, self-indulgent brats; the extreme version is violent criminals.

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articl...ml?storyid=5931 (http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?storyid=5931)

Oh-Dae-Su
8th March 2006, 01:45
wow it totally changed me, lol!!!

i think a criminal can be anybody, if you think about it , everytime you go into the street with a car or hold a knife in your hands you have the power not only to take someone's life but also your own. It is true that certain things make people into criminals, it depends on the environment they live on, they can come from dysfunctional families. But how often haven't we heard the phrase , "i always thought he was so normal, and nice !" lmao...the human subconscious is an interesting thing, if you think back, at the most horrible things you have ever thought, i think you will even be ashamed of yourself, even scared of yourself for even thinking such horrendous things, and the fact is that most of us can control the things or impulses in the back of our minds, and maybe say to ourselves "this is morally wrong", but some of us don't control them and well, we have seen what that has done, ie. Hitler/Stalin/Mao just to name a few.

encephalon
8th March 2006, 02:09
Capitalists are criminals that choose their crime.

Oh-Dae-Su
8th March 2006, 02:24
LMAO!! ^^^

yup i sure do love killing people, and i love choosing the method as well ;)

RIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT! (like Austin Powers)

redstar2000
8th March 2006, 03:54
I don't know, CL, it seems rather superficial to me.

I'm willing to grant that there much mindless psychobabble these days about crime and many other social issues.

Therapists have a living to make...just like real estate agents. :lol:

No sensible person takes seriously any "information" from either source.

Beyond that, what is the substantive content of the essay?

It would seem to be a "rant" against "permissiveness"...something that can be traced back a whopping 2,500 years at least!

The authors may "feel better about themselves", but I don't see any addition to the sum of human knowledge here.

I note that one of the sponsors of this site is a Christian Fascist...which suggests, at least, a less than discerning attitude towards social reality.

What to speculate on the crime rate when Constantine was Emperor?

Hint: it was a lot higher that what we see today. :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

red team
8th March 2006, 11:04
Beside being subjective tripe that I could easily rip to shreds without even needing to bring out the big guns of statistical analysis, this proves absolutely nothing. It just dredges up tired old myths about Capitalism being an equitable system for those who take individual responsibilty.

But, just for fun let's rip this to shreds. :)


In our last article entitled "Why Can’t We Reform our Criminals" we talked about the upsurge of recidivism since the therapeutic mentality took over the task of transitioning criminals back into society. According to this group, it’s parents who didn’t attend every single soccer game, parents who didn’t tolerate their children’s individuality and let them be themselves, or in other words; parents who didn’t grant the kids’ every wish who are to blame.


First, let's talk about individuality. For a society which allegedly prides itself in unfettered individuality, it seems rather hypocritical of the critics to blame a child's individuality for criminal behaviour. Since when does it logically follow that choosing your own path in life from childhood correlate to criminal actions as an adult? More to the point, since when does individuality matter to an economic system which prime directive is the accumulation of value above all else? It seems more true that the natural working of a system which values selfish monetary gains above all else crushes individuality under its economic pressure. Beside the economic system let's talk about the institution of the family. How free are children to not follow a parent's superstition in religious fundamentalist families? Individuality? What utter bunk!


Plus, of course, another major factor is "Society" in general. We, as a society, just didn’t care enough, weren’t tolerant enough, and expected too much.


What did you really expect from a society which unwritten motto is: get rich yourself by short changing everybody else? Did you really expected cooperation? Did you really expect the "losers" in such a cannibalistic society to quietly accept their fate of physical extinction? Perhaps some would quietly self-terminate, but I would really expect the rest to compete in the rawest and most unrestrained sense of word and that's where "crime" comes in.


Gasp... there was even competition in schools and - gasp - children were actually grade-ranked on their academic performance. So, there’s the root cause of crime. It’s not the criminals’ fault! It’s everybody else’s fault. It’s society’s fault.


Competency in a subject matter is one thing, but where does ultra-competition as practiced and valued by Capitalist society leads? This is simply egotistical elitism as an excuse for hoarding and the introduction of artificial scarcity. There can be no such thing as being equally competent in Capitalism. Competition does not have to lead to elitism in which only the most skilled "wins". Furthermore, if a greater number of equally competent personnel produces a greater quantity and quality in output than simply a few elite personnel does that not justify having them contribute to society? As with anything else in an ultra-competitive system, ideology wins over practicality.


However, typical of the therapeutic mentality, they’ve got it all upside down. Studies have shown that those who chose crime - yes, they chose crime, it wasn’t the only alternative - did so because of the very things that are now accepted as normal child rearing patterns. Let the children "be themselves," don’t burden them with "unrealistic expectations" and when they inevitably make mistakes, don’t criticize them. Or at least blame the schools or society, but never, ever, ask the child to take responsibility for their own actions. Respect for parents and authority are just "old fashioned" notions. Instead, we should embrace the "progressive" notion that children already have within themselves all the knowledge they need. They don’t need the advice and counsel of grown-ups; they just need to be "empowered" to bring out their natural, inherent goodness. They won’t benefit from self-respect, but they’ll wither without self-esteem.


Note the subjectiveness of this whole paragraph. For example, what's "unrealistic expectations" or "responsibility for their own actions" or even "Respect for parents and authority". Not that children don't need to have goals and expectations or take responsibility or have respect for some people, but are these to be unquestionable absolutes or does it really depend on the context? There are some things that are really unrealistic to expect. There are some situations that are really not your fault and that you have no control over. There are some parents and "authority" which no reasonable person, let alone children, should respect.


In order to bring out this inherent wisdom and goodness, they must never be allowed to compete; hence, grades in school should adjusted to make them feel good about themselves. Games and group activities should be re-framed as opportunities for everyone to be a winner. Note, we’re not talking about the sportsmanlike winner congratulating the loser for a good showing, but actually calling the loser a winner too. We shouldn’t reward observed excellence. That would be too judgmental. That would be too harsh.


I don't respect incompetence. But neither do I respect elitism. However, being equally competent is an impossible proposition under this system. As always, ideology takes precedence over practicality and elitist quality over common quantity and quality.

The rest of the post degenerates fairly quickly to subjective, unverifiable conjectures with equally subjective and unverifiable conclusions which is not even worth responding to.